(A.K.A. Non-Original Rants)

–Co-opting good stuff from all over the ‘Net and maybe some original thoughts—ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Solar is not green energy

The chemicals it takes to manufacture solar panels and batteries wreak havoc on the environment–just pulling them out of ground.  The manufacturing process is also such that the EPA won’t let it be done in the US.  And the end product?  Yeah, not so much on the purported environmentally friendly either.

Especially when those solar panels are pounded to dust by a hailstorm.  Four thousand acres of them.

That’s a LOT of chemicals being released.  IMO, EPA Superfund levels of cancer-causing chemicals.  Right into the soil and water table.  

ETA:  there are only certain types of solar panels that will release chemicals when broken (thin film or Copper Indium Gallium Selenide panels).  I don’t know what kind of panels are in those fields (and since no one can get ahold of the environmental impact study, no one else does either).

ETA Again:  It is unlikely that there will be any chemicals released from the panels themselves.  However, there is quite a mess out there and a lot of broken glass.  Considering the scope, there’s a lot of cleanup to be done.  And still, no environmental impact study.  The only thing that the Fighting Jays website says about hail damage is that there is insurance.

And local residents have been (and were denied before the project started) copies of the environmental impact reports.

When he first saw the damage, Kaminski says he was shocked.

He was one of the residents worried about the environmental impact before the solar farms were built.

“That’s correct. I was worried about it,” Kaminski said.

Nick showed us emails he sent to Fort Bend County Commissioners, the Fort Bend Economic Development Council, and the owners of Fighting J’s Solar Farm asking for the environmental impact report.

“We’ve asked for the same studies, and we’ve been treated the same way,” said Mikes Fugua who also lives near the solar farms. “We got nothing out of them.”

“My concern is the hail damage that came through and busted these panels we now have some highly toxic chemicals that could be potentially leaking into our water tables,” said Kaminski

“There’s numerous makeup in the chemicals on this thing,” Fugua said. “The majority of them are cancer-causing.”

 People are being sold a bill of goods when they are being told that solar farms are ‘environmentally friendly and green’.  They are the exact opposite.



  1. That the Environmental Impact study isn't being produced for any and all to see is telling. Kinda like the election data of the most secure election Ever. Scrutiny of the Pure can only reveal All is As Advertised and All is Well, right? So what are they hiding?

    Like

  2. it takes more energy to build, transport, erect and maintain solar cells that they will ever create in their whole lifespan.

    Like

  3. Anon: While that used to be true, it isn't any more. The payback over 20 years is now approaching 1.5:1 energy wise. Having said that, to ever use Solar cells when there is another possibility is foolish. But solar panels themselves (the finished product) are not terribly polluting or dangerous. Basically dirty glass. The mining of the materials, the manufacturing…those are terrible. But the panels themselves are pretty inert once made.

    Like

  4. Friendly to my fiscal environment and flowing with green(backs). Fuck you and my horse you rode in on.Fixed it for you.p.s. You owe me for the horse

    Like

  5. Justin–Yeah, whenever they hide something it's because it's something bad.Anon–Yep. Like windmills. Ultimately not green and definitely not wildlife friendly.Anon 8:13: I think we need to factor in the mining and manufacturing if we are looking at solar panels as a whole. In this case, it might be a non-issue as far as the smashed panels, but we don't know for sure because their is no public environmental impact study.Anon 10:13: I have no fucking idea where you are going with this. Are you talking about the companies?

    Like

  6. The environmental impact of the sites is minimal. Generally less than a housing development as far as runoff is concerned. My feeling taking good farm or pasture land out of production is not terribly smart. Much of the film used in solar panels is made in Towanda, PA at a former DuPont facility, it might be owned by Sylvania now. Shipped most of their production to the PRC or Taiwan.Maybe they should put the panels under a roof to protect the glass? I am waiting for AOC to suggest that.

    Like

  7. the laws of thermodynamics will not be overturned by the wishful thinking of the greens.

    Like

  8. Gerry—I stand corrected on that point and agree that taking pasture and farmland for this purpose is not the best idea. I’m sure we will hear from AOC shortly!Anon— True!

    Like

  9. That the Environmental Impact study isn't being produced for any and all to see is telling. Kinda like the election data of the most secure election Ever. Scrutiny of the Pure can only reveal All is As Advertised and All is Well, right? So what are they hiding?

    Like

  10. it takes more energy to build, transport, erect and maintain solar cells that they will ever create in their whole lifespan.

    Like

  11. Anon: While that used to be true, it isn't any more. The payback over 20 years is now approaching 1.5:1 energy wise. Having said that, to ever use Solar cells when there is another possibility is foolish. But solar panels themselves (the finished product) are not terribly polluting or dangerous. Basically dirty glass. The mining of the materials, the manufacturing…those are terrible. But the panels themselves are pretty inert once made.

    Like

  12. Friendly to my fiscal environment and flowing with green(backs). Fuck you and my horse you rode in on.Fixed it for you.p.s. You owe me for the horse

    Like

  13. Justin–Yeah, whenever they hide something it's because it's something bad.Anon–Yep. Like windmills. Ultimately not green and definitely not wildlife friendly.Anon 8:13: I think we need to factor in the mining and manufacturing if we are looking at solar panels as a whole. In this case, it might be a non-issue as far as the smashed panels, but we don't know for sure because their is no public environmental impact study.Anon 10:13: I have no fucking idea where you are going with this. Are you talking about the companies?

    Like

  14. The environmental impact of the sites is minimal. Generally less than a housing development as far as runoff is concerned. My feeling taking good farm or pasture land out of production is not terribly smart. Much of the film used in solar panels is made in Towanda, PA at a former DuPont facility, it might be owned by Sylvania now. Shipped most of their production to the PRC or Taiwan.Maybe they should put the panels under a roof to protect the glass? I am waiting for AOC to suggest that.

    Like

  15. the laws of thermodynamics will not be overturned by the wishful thinking of the greens.

    Like

  16. Gerry—I stand corrected on that point and agree that taking pasture and farmland for this purpose is not the best idea. I’m sure we will hear from AOC shortly!Anon— True!

    Like

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *